Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breathless Beauty, Broken Beauty

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:40, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Breathless Beauty, Broken Beauty[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable artwork. Prod declined. It is on temporary exhibition for one art festival. WP:BEFORE finds several passing mentions in the context of the festival. No sources dedicated to the work. no critical analysis. no mention of influence on other artists or works (not surprising since its brand new)

Article contains 3 links to WP:PRIMARY affiliated sources. No

Suggest redirection to London Design Festival where it could merit a brief mention.

Prod decline claims notability due to claimed unique features of the work. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

artist:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Comment: As a "film" this lacks coverage to meet WP:NF, yes... but as a unique work of art that is being displayed in galleries we have other considerations, yes? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 16:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MichaelQSchmidt long time no see, I believe we have not interacted since Rome, Sweet Rome. There are many unique pieces of art that are displayed in galleries and museums. Very few (percentage wise) are notable. This one is only exhibited temporarily to boot. It has won no awards, received no commentary or critique. or any other trappings of notability. The artist was certainly selected to create the work by the museum for the exhibition, but that would be true of whatever bit of art she happened to create. The one she actually did create has not been noticed by anyone subsequently. using WP:ARTIST as a proxy, its possible that it could satisfy 4.b but its borderline, and it certainly fails 1-3 and 4a,c, and d. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well... to be fair, I've been a part of several and installation pieces are not the same as permanent; they usually travel and are seen at only one location at a time. This brand new article may simply fall under a version of TOO SOON. It's public appearance is recent and it may capture the attention of reliable sources. If so, we can consider undeletion or recreation. Does its author or an article contributor wish it userfied? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 20:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am certainly not arguing that this work can never become notable, just that it isn't now. (Although I think its more appropriate to treat it as a work of art than a film, even though film is involved.) Gaijin42 (talk) 20:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Pat O'Neill's The Decay of Fiction, Michael Haussman's A Study in Gravity and Yoshua Okón's Salò Island are similar... art statements displayed in a film format. Some of the artists and works have articles. Others, not yet. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 20:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 02:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Second: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ~~non~~ barely sourced artist spam. a temporary installation at a museum by a non-notable artist is hardly worthy of the encyclopedia.Cramyourspam (talk) 14:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retain - This article details an important technical 'world's first' being the first example of a 12K Video Sculpture anywhere in the world - something which is technically complex to achieve and even more so to do with artistic integrity. As such it has rightly earned a place in the history books, which ought to be sufficient justification for a few K of space on a Wikipedia server. The world is waking up to 4K video, and 8K has been recently demonstrated. 12K systems are already in development by major technology manufacturers, and will become more and more important over the coming years. Acknowledging and learning about early examples of this technology cover an *essential* part of information technology history, irrespective of the artist's individual merit. Indeed unprecedented artistic endeavours like this often become signposts for both art and technology followers. As a unique physical experience which cannot be reproduced 'online' - this work must be experienced to be appreciated. Arguably, anyone who has not witnessed this artwork *in person* may not be qualified to judge its merit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.233.250 (talk) 09:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

what "history books" would those be exactly, artist-IP? and the trivial technical "first" is not much of a claim to fame. i don't think the "first" art video in 8mm film, 16mm film, VHS tape, MP4 video, MOV video, (etc etc etc) or any other format has its own encyclopedia article. if there exists an article about this 12k video format, then there could be included there a line or two: "the first (sic SOURCES?) art video in 12k video format was Breathless Beauty, Broken Beauty by artist/filmmaker Vanessa Jane Hall" --and even that is a stretch. Cramyourspam (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The art doesn't use the non-existent 12k video format. It is 3 4k displays put together. Otherwise known as a Video wall, a technique that has been out for decades. And Video sculpture has been a thing since the 50s (and note the actual pioneers in that field of art do not have articles dedicated to their pieces) Gaijin42 (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.